4 ms·

What exactly is the evil that Facebook is supposedly trying to not see? And how would making reach data available make it easier for Facebook to see evil? Or i

by zohch 5y ago

What exactly is the evil that Facebook is supposedly trying to not see? And how would making reach data available make it easier for Facebook to see evil? Or if Facebook is trying to hide the evil, what evil is it they are trying to hide? What will the reach data reveal that is so evil? And if the evil is manifest without reach data, why does it matter?

Hokusai 5y ago
> What exactly is the evil that Facebook is supposedly trying to not see? I see that you are new here, this is not Reddit. You should read the linked article before posting, there you can find the answer to this question and others. Be informed, be polite.
- zohch 5y ago
  I did read the article, twice. I can't figure it out. That is why I asked. How is your response polite?
- gunapologist99 5y ago
  > I see that you are new here, this is not Reddit. It seemed like an honest question; this response may have been a bit harsh to a newbie. (if it even really is a newbie and not just a new account.) "Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - windowojji 5y ago
    Not just that: > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
- Gunax 5y ago
  It would be nice if we all came to the same conclusions if we just read the same material. But reality doesnt work that way. Assuming we are just dolts who cannot read because we disagree is a bit presumptuous.
Gunax 5y ago
To understand the argument that 'facebook is evil' requires more context than what is explicitly stated in this article. It's more of a followup or continuation of a long running thread. Basically there is a long thread about Facebook being a haven for the worst qualities of human discussion: insular, xenophobic, and reactionary. This started to get really big during the Cambridge analytica scandel but has continued from there. In short the argument is that Facebook knowingly allows the aforementioned culture to manifest. In many parts of the world, this has resulted in real world consequences and deaths. That they refuse to divulge the most popular articles is, in this authors mind, a sort of coverup. Personally I don't fully agree with this assessment. As facebook has become more and more of 'the web', replacing the distributed forums and chatrooms that once dominated, it's also become a reflection of us. Facebook is in a bind no matter what it does--it's either guilty of censorship or misinformation.

by zohch 5y ago

Hokusai 5y ago

> What exactly is the evil that Facebook is supposedly trying to not see? I see that you are new here, this is not Reddit. You should read the linked article before posting, there you can find the answer to this question and others. Be informed, be polite.

zohch 5y ago
I did read the article, twice. I can't figure it out. That is why I asked. How is your response polite?
gunapologist99 5y ago
> I see that you are new here, this is not Reddit. It seemed like an honest question; this response may have been a bit harsh to a newbie. (if it even really is a newbie and not just a new account.) "Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- windowojji 5y ago
  Not just that: > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."
Gunax 5y ago
It would be nice if we all came to the same conclusions if we just read the same material. But reality doesnt work that way. Assuming we are just dolts who cannot read because we disagree is a bit presumptuous.

Gunax 5y ago

To understand the argument that 'facebook is evil' requires more context than what is explicitly stated in this article. It's more of a followup or continuation of a long running thread. Basically there is a long thread about Facebook being a haven for the worst qualities of human discussion: insular, xenophobic, and reactionary. This started to get really big during the Cambridge analytica scandel but has continued from there. In short the argument is that Facebook knowingly allows the aforementioned culture to manifest. In many parts of the world, this has resulted in real world consequences and deaths. That they refuse to divulge the most popular articles is, in this authors mind, a sort of coverup. Personally I don't fully agree with this assessment. As facebook has become more and more of 'the web', replacing the distributed forums and chatrooms that once dominated, it's also become a reflection of us. Facebook is in a bind no matter what it does--it's either guilty of censorship or misinformation.